eevBLAB 103 - Is an $800 Oscilloscope OVERKILL?

[@ugetridofit]

Dam... Only Dave can turn a 5 minute answer into a gabbing 17+ minute video.

[@flymypg]

What? You don't watch Dave at 2x speed? Makes it a 9-minute video! 🤣

[@stardelta9508]

Never realised you could do that 😂😂

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

Yes. FT GOWI. Failure to get on with it.

[@TubeSkaterRudy]

Yeah, but it never gets boring the way he keeps doing his enthousiast talking looking at his expressions and listening to his intonations. Let's admit it, we all love Dave.

[@TechMechanism]

That's why his view getting low

[@matthiash.4670]

The shown RIGOL is definitely worth the price! You can hack the firmware and you have 350MHz / 4 channel. I would buy it again :D

[@rednecktech9485]

Dang really?

[@matthiash.4670]

Yeah, really... wasn't a joke at all. You can enable EVERYTHING this hardware has to offer. 16 channel logic analyzer, 2 channel wave gen, 8GS/s, 200 Mpts, 4 channel, 350MHz, all signal decoder, all math functions... simply everything. Finally you have the full MSO5000 pricetag. I don't know the price yet, but ranges somewhere around 2500-3000 bucks.

[@sokolum]

Hence their price, because they are aware of?

[@sandmann7777]

They are aware of it. I did this „hack“ many years ago. I could imagine that they protect it better nowadays. Check if it is still possible with the latest models.

[@za_ozero]

Have this scope hacked once again just recently to casually update firmware. Can do proofs :)

[@pie314isi]

this stretches to professional use too. At all my workplaces there has been at some point a discussion about what gear the lab needs. Lots of discussion about spectrum analysers, VNAs, 20GHz scopes etc. Actually, what the labs needs is 10 more entry level scopes for day to day work so we don't have to fight with the software engineers.

[@chromosundrift]

Software engineer here. We don't want to fight either.

[@robinsattahip2376]

Don't make the mistake I did, I bought a cheap CDEK brand for about $200 then outgrew it (and realized it was a joke) and bought a Rigol 1054Z. For what I paid I could have this scope. Buy a good one from the start.

[@bobcarter6143]

As a home hobbyist I started with an $80 2 probe Hantek Pc scope, got annoyed having to use the laptop so I upgraded to a very old B&W LCD Tek TDS1002 for $130 that was great for 5 years then I bought a second hand Rigol 1054Z for the 4 probes. Very Happy with that machine (after I swapped out the fan for a quite one!)

[@smurface549]

Likewise. Starting with a Hantek PC scope, and very quickly I got annoyed with fiddling with the additional cables and device on the desk. Plus the SW was shitty. So I upgraded to a Rigol 1054Z and I'm really happy with it. For what I'm doing, there's no need to go with anything bigger / faster / more expensive. Of course I use it only sporadically, so YMMV...

[@NullStaticVoid]

yeah the Rigol gets bashed by pros that have HP or Kiethley scopes. But I think for a lot of hobbyists like me that have only ever had analog scopes it's a freaking luxury car with power everything.

[@nameredacted1242]

We have 1GHz Tek scopes at work that technicians don't know to use... Smart way is your way!

[@tubastuff]

Regardless of the bells and whistles of a new DSO, it's still worthwhile to keep around an old analogue scope. I have an ancient Tek 465B for those occasions when I want to watch things as they're happening. No menus, just knobs.

[@TheTrueCBaer]

​@@tubastuff yeah, i bought a Iwatsu SS-5702 (Analog 2x20MHz pretty basic but has a continuous Z-Axis input) as a vector display for my homebrew vectrex project. The XY-Mode of my Rigol MSO1104Z is only worth running away from. Or walking away from because its really slow.....

[@rickeymh]

My first real O'scope was an HP 100MHz with storage. I purchased it for $800 back in 1982 and it was not working. I was able to repair for $18 which included a service manual and a replacement resistor. Everyone said I got a steal of a deal.

[@SirMo]

I have a soft spot for the older HP scopes. I find their interface layouts were the best. I still have a HP 54610B (90s vintage) that's a joy to use. Too bad the sample rate on it leaves a lot to be desired, but it's my favorite scope to use. Whoever designed the UI on the scope was a genius.

[@cesareferrari8056]

I went through this thought process a couple of years ago when deciding on a scope. It came down to this scope, or spending more for the Siglent SDS2104X Plus. Siglent had a sale on in my region so I managed to get the Siglent with some extra bits which were steeply discounted, so this worked out for me. So keep an eye out for deals from distributors as they are often in the position of trying to shift old stock when newer models are released, so there can be 'bargains' to be had (relatively speaking!)

[@hallolo2]

In general I agree with you on that. However I think that the Siglent 2000X Plus Series might also just be at the edge of hobby use. I am really glad that I purchased the Siglent Scope instead of the Rigol one. It is just more polished and in general you feel the higher quality and performance and it always brings joy to me while using it. The user interface is just more advanced on the Siglent and there are so many more perks that the Siglent has. For example the responsiveness of the scope, frontend noise and therefore ENOB, quality of software etc... . It is not an insignificate uplift in price but in my opinion it can still make sense for hobby use.

[@Dan-oo1rj]

And mouse + keyboard support over the USB! I'm using my Siglent scope via mouse, not the touch screen for a year and I'm happy! It;s so much better than touching the screen!

[@rim3899]

On the other hand, for a hobbyist, the MSO5000 has 2 function generators which can be used and set up for modulation experiments, and with the 2x higher sample rate you can (at least) resolve 2+ GHz FFT peaks quite easily. You can also use a usb mouse/keyboard and VNC with this scope (as with the Siglent), plus a convenient hdmi output, in addition.

[@ikocheratcr]

I think the budget you have when setting up a lab "from scratch" is what defines if something is overkill. If one has $1k, a $400 scope is overkill. The reality is that one never starts that from scratch when deciding to buy an scope, there are other things you go for first.

[@StuartCGadgetRev]

I got one as my first scope. I needed the MSO for my first ‘real’ project and got excited reading about the specs of this thing for the price. Don’t regret it at all. Now I would like an R&S, but those are out of my price range! The Rigol has been bloody brilliant so far.

[@shinsoku9128]

what was your first 'real' project?

[@StuartCGadgetRev]

@@shinsoku9128 it was a 'simple' 4G data logger. I hacked the scope (obviously) and used it for signals and serial decoding. Didn't need the speed, but the big screen was handy when I had serial and a few signals.

[@Mr.Newlove]

Just bought the Rigol MSO5074 on Wednesday! will be delivered Tuesday!! My first real scope after using a USB scope for ~8 years. If the new 1204G series keysight wasn't so locked down they would have had my money hands down though.

[@TheDefpom]

The SDS1104X-E can be hacked up to 200MHz too, and fully optioned.

[@jimmysyar889]

I’ve got both and I have to say the only thing I miss on the sds is the response of it

[@erintyres3609]

Four channels is definitely the way to go. I often want to watch different parts of the circuit, and I am completely happy that I did not get a two channel scope. I like that the MSO5074 has a set of knobs for each channel.

[@ornotermes]

I don't know about the MSO5000 series, or even the 1000Z series for sale today... but the really nice thing about 1000Z when i bought it was that it was possible to enable all the features with the Riglol key gen. That was worth a lot for me as a hobbyist and why i bought multiple Rigol tools that could be upgraded by the same key gen.

[@tomaszwota1465]

This one can be upgraded in software as well. 350 MHz is a lot of bandwidth for the price.

[@xfactor529]

Dave didn’t even mention the Rigol DS1202Z-E! It has been great for everything I’ve needed so far as a hobbyist. 2CH, 200MHZ with a nice display for $299. Pleasantly surprised with what I got for the price tag

[@Bluscream]

He said he didnt want to recommend 2CH scopes

[@lagg070988]

I have this one!! And a old hameg 203-6

[@GeorgePapadopoulos11]

I just bought it and I’m very happy with it. Personally two channels are enough for me no need for the four.

[@chublez]

Eh about 25% saved for 50% less channels...better be absolutely sure you'll never need a 3rd channel.

[@arnotek]

I went with a Siglent 1204X-E which turned out to be the right choice for me. For example, having 4 channels was especially useful when trying to understand op-amps. (Additionally, the digital probe option has also been very useful.) Yes, it cost more going with the 4 channel instead of the 2 channel, but it was definitely worth it. I have regretted buying low more than buying high. For example, I bought a Siglent SPD3303X-E power supply and with what I know now, I would have preferred the SPD3303X for the extra money to get the additional resolution. I have lost count how many times I wished I had that extra digit.

[@michaelkaercher]

I think the message was not: Buy the Rigol. The message was that for a hobbyist a 1000$ Scope is ok. Looking at your scope it is 1000$ without the digital probes. The Rigol one is 1000$ including the digital probes. When I bought this Rigol, the sales guy recommended the Siglent but it would have been 300 Euro more expensive. The Rigol one was already a stretch for my usecase.

[@slawekkrolik]

Got both, both hacked, both awesome! 1054z and 5072(buy 5074 for additional probes). Awesome hobbyist gear, probably will suit me till end of my life

[@LtKernelPanic]

Finally had time to sit down and watch this since I'm in the market for a scope. Currently I don't really do much electronics tinkering and have never really needed one but lately I've started to tinker with tube radios and have wished I had one a couple times recently. I've seen some people say you should get a 150MHz scope to be able to cover the SW and broadcast bands and others have said a 100 or even a 50MHz scope is plenty for working on old radios. I see Siglent has a 4 channel 100MHz for 399 right now which is about the top end of my budget. I also saw a 200MHz Rigol that was $299 but only two channels. My gut feeling is get the 4 channel even though for my needs I probably won't ever need all four. Also before someone suggests it I really have no desire to get an old analog scope (ironic I know since I'm working on tube radios) because it'll take up way too much of the limited bench space I have and I want something I know will just work out of the box with no futzing around.

[@KG4JYS]

Kind of a relieving video to watch. I upgraded my 1054z to a 5074 (now 5354) last month. Man, I can't overstate how excellent the touchscreen feature is. Also, I've been delving into digital stuff a good deal lately, and the logic analyzer was helpful for that. I would not have done the upgrade without having been able to hack the thing. The same goes for the original 1054z purchase. I play with RF often, but I mostly use the TinySA ultra ($100 6Ghz calibrated or 20GHz uncalibrated SA) and a LibreVNA (6GHz VNA). I've been using them for amateur radio stuff at 5.8GHz. Having a benchtop version of the SA would be nice, but the VNA needs to be portable anyway.

[@stepheneskelson7774]

I agree. the performance of the low priced rigols and siglents have really changed what we use for scopes, my original 500 series tek was quite a budget hit, (long time ago) and it seems to me that I've rarely needed more then 300 mhz

[@johncasteel1780]

Ah, another TEK groupie, well, *former* TEK groupie. I have a fully functional 2465B, $250 delivered from eBay. I fell in love with the 2465B when my military shop replaced our old 485Bs in around 1985 or so. For me, at home, a 2465B is overkill.

[@NikiBretschneider]

In fact, this much more depends on your skill and what you are doing than on a price tag. It starts being a overkill at a point, where the device has features, that are unusable because the operator lacks skills to properly use them. So the point, where it becomes an overkill, much more depends on the operator itself and his ability to learn something new, than on a price tag or particular brand or model. The higher price tag typically means that device has some unique features, so it's much more complicated to choose right model for your particular purpose, because these devices are much less general purpose than devices on with a entry level price tag, which then results in a silly questions like "is this a good choice" or "isn't this an overkill" or "what is the best choice for this price level". Asking these questions typically means it is an overkill and you are preparing yourself to waste your money. If you exactly know what you need, you are asking how some specialized features works, if they are well implemented, etc, it's much more concerned around your needs than on a price tag. Okay, it have to be a kind of affordable, but if you exactly know what you need, then you know what it costs, you know your budget and you have to do some compromises, but this is much more manageable situation than something like "Hey, I have $1k, what oscilloscope should I buy?" "Okay, what you need it for?" "Hey, dude, I've completely no idea." In fact, don't get involved into situations like this. The only this can result into is a wasting money and people get angry as they realize they've wasted money. Replies like "If I have a $1k I would buy …" are dumb and silly, because people are different, and, well, some of them are much more different than others. And if you are rude enough (as I am), you should tell them something like "You have to learn how to drive before you buy your Lamborghini", because this is exactly the same situation. You should have driving skills before you buy an expensive car, you should have some math skills before you buy an scientific calculator etc., otherwise those things are completely useless and it's nothing than a wasting money. And if you have no skills and lot of money, then, well, that's typically a very sad story… And one more girly thing (because I am a girl…well, an obsolete one). Just imagine a young lady (I mean really young, not as "young" as we, vintage people, are) wearing a luxury high heels shoes without ability to manage the height of her heels. She is completely ridiculous in that situation despite the fact she is wearing something luxury and very expensive, something I simply cannot afford. I hope we all agree this is an ridiculous situation, at least to the moment, when she break her ankle. But this is exactly the same situation I've seen many times on youtube, where someone is trying to review some complicated and expensive equiptment without the ability to properly use it. He doesn't get how ridiculous it is, the same as that young lady doesn't, but with a little difference. There is a lot of people on the same (or lower) experience level (typically hobbyists), writing comments like how good that review was, which depicts this completely silly and ridiculous situation like being completely normal, which definitely is not. Just remember how ridiculous this could be and do something about that. And, in fact, it is easy. Just download the manual of that thing, walk through all features and functionality that device has trying to imagine what you could do with that functionality. Try to design some experiments just to demontrate it. Maybe, you realize you have to learn a lot of things to do this, but at this moment, it doesn't cost any money. And when you are done with all functionality it has, then simply download another manual and do the same. And do it again and again until you find something, that catch your interest by opening whole new world of possibilities, something you want to explore, something you want to do. And then you have the use case and you can choose the right model. And, maybe, you realize you need $2k or even more, but that's pretty normal. Furthermore, it's no more wasting money, because you catch your direction at this point, you know what you want to do, and you are just paying not for oscilloscope, multimeter, whatever, but you are paying for your way forward. Learning, exploring and moving forward are imperatives of all humanity. And despite this is a completely private thing, it's not something like wasting money anymore, because it gives you satisfaction, which is something, that spending $1k in a situation "hey, dude, I have $1k and don't know what to do with it, maybe I would buy an oscilloscope" simply doesn't gives you. Sometimes is spending money much more complicated than earning them.

[@xyz87332]

what's the to;dr then

[@gregorymccoy6797]

I'm completely on board with that assessment.

[@OzRetrocomp]

It depends on the hobbyist and their use case. I can't speak on behalf of other hobbyists but for me, this is way more scope than I'd ever possibly need. That being said, if I was using it every second weekend for 10 years straight (assuming it'll last that long), I could probably justify buying one of these as a 50th birthday present to myself. Mind you that's a couple of years away and there might be another killer scope released at a sub-$1k price point in the meantime. Definitely the sort of scope to work towards rather than starting out with IMHO.

[@swolebro]

I love how the picture at 5:40 said "NFG" on it. That's how you distinguish your usable scope from your parts scope!

[@arnotek]

"No Further Good" 😁

[@andrewwhite1793]

For professional use it's quite easy to burn through 1000 USD due to a wrong move. Re-spinning a PCB and finding you have not fixed the problem really smarts. It puts the cost into perspective.

[@RPrice_OG]

My advice for anything really is to always buy the best(not necessarily most expensive) that you can reasonably afford. That said, I use a Siglent 1202x-e which does everything I want for playing around with MCUs. I went with the 2 channel version because I personally would never use more than 2 and I probably will need the higher bandwidth. But that's just me. The $800 scope featured is certainly not overkill if you can use any of the features it has over the less expensive models. They all beat my first one, a Tektronix 535 that I got used for a couple hundred dollars in the late 70s. Great video.

[@TheDefpom]

The SDS2104X Plus can be “improved” up to over 600MHz by enabling the 500MHz option, mine works up to 670MHz at the 3dB point, also fully optioned with all the decoding options.

[@arm-cv7rd]

@@wendeltech its on the eevblog

[@arm-cv7rd]

@@wendeltech use the link under, you just have to fork it, remember that you have write the codes as all lower case, if I remember correctly you dont put the - sign between each 4 letters of the scope id

[@arm-cv7rd]

@@wendeltech you can just reply to me here and ill walk you through it!

[@TheDefpom]

@@wendeltech it’s on the EEVBlog forum

[@gnather]

Due specifically to your recommendations I bought the Rigol DS1054Z and then I actually won a Siglent 1104X-E I use them a lot and they have never let me down. The only thing I wish I had was the logic analyzer since I now teach a Digital Logic Lab....but the schools got one so.... Anyway you are right on the mark. Thanks

[@SuperToughnut]

This video is exactly what I needed. Thanks!

[@rabidbigdog]

My Rigol 1054Z, which I was introduced to on this very channel is still going strong and I love it.

[@rabidbigdog]

I hope to graduate to an Agilent.

[@mc_cpu]

I have a 2 channel scope, probe 2 is still in it's bag unopened. I do Arduino type stuff and a bit of audio. Do have a clone logic analyser which I use more.

[@L4b3n]

Bought the 50MHz 2CH Rigol around 15 years ago. Did the job, but the 2CHs are definitely the biggest downside. Since my workspace shifted to my own basement (90% of the time), I bought the 2000x+. 100% overkill, but sharing the results live (desktop via vnc), …. I‘m loving it. For me it’s worth the money. ❤

[@goaway2174]

I agree as a tool to do a job! I have used one of the MSO5000 for electronic testing at work (great specs and features - love their intensity graded displays), that said I purchased a more expensive R&S that doesn't have as good of specifications as the Rigol but is just more intuitive to use from my perspective. The MSO5000 seemed to often have a delayed response to changes in knob position for vertical and horizontal adjustment and while not a deal breaker was irritating.

[@_a_x_s_]

I started from a £100 200MHz analogue scope. It was fine for me for about 2 years. However, as my interest goes further and further and my space is not enough. I started to purchase a better option. I then came up with Siglent SDS2104 with a crazy discount and a bunch of bundles included. The price was £1400 in total, which is definitely an overkill by price said by Dave. But I am quite happy about that feature as I was using it to test some high speed PCB and some strange RF circuits, which a lower end oscilloscope cannot do. But for beginners, go for a used analogue one or a smalle USB ONES. Stick to it, and you will soon find out whether you need a better one later.

[@NinerFourWhiskey]

Depends on what you're doing. High bandwidth stuff is more and more within reach of the hobbyist, both on the test side and the thing-your-working-on side, as higher speed digital chips and eval boards are pretty cheap these days. I remember when a 5mhz scope was consider, "overkill".

[@fullwaverecked]

Im planning to buy a modern scope, but so far I own 3 Kikusui COS 5060s, a Tektronix 320 digital, 1959 Tektronix 317, and a Sencore vector scope from the sixties. Never paid more than $50.00 for each. Some were $10.00... They all do audio nicely... Cheers!

[@bastianhecker4409]

Thanks for the nice video, Dave! I went to similar thoughts and did buy the Rigol MSO5000 back then, and it was a great buy: 8 GSa/s, I was just blown away :) The signal gen can even do proper modulation schemes. But soon, I found the frontend quite noisy and needed to build a few custom boards to circumvent this. But then I got my hands on a Siglent sds2000x plus and it's still my go to scope: much better and more responsive UI, low noise frontend with 500 uV/div, and ADCs with much better ENOB values. So yeah, I generally agree with you, and the Rigol is a super piece of gear. But personally, I would go further and recommend the Siglent SDS2000x plus ... and yep, I couldn't imagine why someone would need more than this thing has to offer ;)

[@michaelkaercher]

Fair enough. But including digital probes the siglent is roughly double the price.

[@j1952d]

When I retired (mostly) a couple of years ago I started messing about with Arduinos. I thought I'd probably need a 'scope, and there's not room in my tiny flat for either of my bench-top 'scopes from work (which are mine - I was self-employed). I do most of my assembly and testing on a tray on my lap! So I got a Hantek USB 'scope 6022BL for about £80 (UK). Most of my circuit debugging has only needed a DMM - I've only needed the 'scope once in 2 years! So I'd advise any hobbyiist to think carefully before shelling out 100s of $/£/whatever.

[@wolfiexii]

My 1104X-E has been great and more than enough for everything I've needed it for so far.

[@antoniopetito]

I dropped the same amount for my Rigol 2000 series, and it’s only an entry model scope. I was moving from a USB based scope, which was a POS. Just wanted to spend the money once and with a piece of mind. And I’m only a hobbyist. I have been toying the idea of a 4 channel scope - this is a good candidate.

[@BryanByTheSea]

Would love to see a similar video on Spectrum Analyzers for hobbyists.

[@BruteClaw]

I got my 1052E about the time they dropped to the $400 price point. While it has been a good scope, the best bang for the buck scope I acquired was Tektronix 475 for helping a friend move. He didn't want to drag it halfway across the US and gave it to me instead of tossing it in the bin.

[@khmr33]

I work on CRTs, concentrating on the signal processing calibration, so I got a Tektronix 2445 which is a wonderful scope and I got a great deal too.

[@wtmayhew]

I have a Tek 2445 which I bought used and a second 2445 for spare parts if needed. The problem with the 2445 is the attenuators can get noisy. The Tek service manual tells you not to disassemble the attenuators, but it really is doable and easy if you aren’t ham handed. I had to clean both attenuators on my used 2445 which came from a US gov’t facility in Hawaii. It is still a great scope and meets its promised specifications. A fully analog scope is still more satisfying for some situations.

[@givenfool6169]

My first oscilloscope was a 50M analog one my university was throwing out. They had like 50 of them on a pallet in the shop and were just sending them off somewhere. The professor I was working for snatched me one (plus a cool analog function generator!). Great start to EE when I hadn't even started my first semester yet. Nowadays I have a siglent 4channel. I felt spoiled with all the nice features on it when I got it. I love single captures.

[@sergejkoch1432]

I also bought the MSO5074 and "patched" the firmware so that I now have the full range of functions. Based on my lab experience so far, this feature set will be more than sufficient for all my projects.

[@TechCornerTV]

A very nice topic & video... as I usually say, you get what you pay for, so couldn't agree more with what you said!

[@Equiluxe1]

How often do you use more than one channel, I find it very rare to use more than the one so a two channel works fine for me.

[@KonradTheWizzard]

All the time. The reason I take out my scope is usually that I want to observe how an input signal is transformed into an output signal and how swapping out components affects quality. So I normally use two channels. Although I don't think I have ever really needed more than two - I'm sure I would use them if available, but so far I'm quite fine with two.

[@alter7979]

Glad you liked the site! Loved seeing it used in the video!! Evan Cirelli Co-Founder TEquipment

[@chrisridesbicycles]

Totally agree. Separate vertical controls are worth it. Personally, I‘d might look at a (used) Keysight but only because that is what I use at work and I‘m so used to the interface. Crazy how much you get for your money today. I remember the „cheap“ Tektronix from 15 years ago. You practically got 10 points of memory depth and a once every now and then update rate.

[@nameredacted1242]

You are lying, it was 14 and a half points! And reliable refresh of 0.5/minute...

[@chublez]

Man. A video of all your recommendations on what bits of kit to buy in what order starting out with the assumption that all you have is a bare bench and an interest would be great. Maybe an annual video. I think we all value your opinion here when looking to buy or upgrade our kit.

[@TheStuffMade]

Depends, if you'll only use it 4 times a year then it's probably overkill, but if you use it regularly then I don't think it's overkill. However for someone just starting out in electronics as a hobby, I'd recommend getting something cheaper first, maybe a $50-$100 handheld model that will still be useful after upgrading to a bigger scope. Personally I like the Micsig tablet style scopes, they're fully features and you can move them around easily to where you need a scope and even run on batteries.

[@Shrek_Holmes]

nah. id recommend they get a cheap rigol or siglent used off of ebay for ~150. if they are new to electronics there isnt a reason to drop 800, unless thats not a problem for them, but if they are fixing budget and all they probably shouldnt spend that just yet. after your used to using a scope and want to expand what you can do, go for something like that 800 one. I bought my 2 channel 1000 series Rigol 2 channel. and I outgrew it, I already knew how to use scopes from college, but I need a better one now.

[@wtmayhew]

For a starter, I’d recommend an Owon HDS-2102 Scope Meter. It is a fantastic instrument for well under $250 US if you shop around. Owon isn’t as familiar a name as Siglent and Rigol, but their equipment is similar build quality The HDS-2102 is what replaced the Fluke 8060 I carried in my tool bag for the better part of four decades. The 8060A still works, but it is nice to have an additional 100 MHz oscilloscope and 25 MHz function generator occupying about the same space and same mass.

[@robertadsett5273]

Depending on what you’re doing, the isolation of a battery powered scope can be very useful

[@xyz87332]

Handheld really sucks, so difficult to operate

[@TheStuffMade]

@@xyz87332 Woosh...

[@74656trekkie]

Got myself a refurbished Keysight DSOX1202A a few years ago for about 500 EUR for the home lab. Very happy with that. Acutally I search for a crappy cheap handheld scope with at least 10 MHz bandwith, so that I do not need to carry the Keysight around for just small repairs that I sometimes do for friends and family. In most of these cases it is more than enough to just see if a signal exists.

[@thomasmaughan4798]

I have a Fluke 123 scopemeter for that sort of thing. Plus, running on battery there's no risk of shorting the device under test to ground.

[@PhillipRhodes]

The answer is definitely "it depends", but just to illustrate where I fall on this. I consider myself a hobbyist, and my first scope was a Rigol DS1102E 100Mhz scope that sold for somewhere around $350.00 USD at the time. I later upgraded to a Rigol DS1104Z Plus that cost me about $640.00 USD in 2019. Then I got a nice bonus at work a year or so later and splurged on a Rigol MSO7024 that set me back about $4,000.00 USD. Now take a guess which scope I spend the most time using? Yep, the venerable old DS1102E. Which scope do I never turn on (because I'm scared to use it, due to its cost)? Yep, the MSO7024. But so much of it depends on what kinds of projects to work on, and how much time you spend on electronics, etc. But for me, the MSO7024 is *definitely* "overkill" and arguably the DS110Z Plus is also overkill. Especially factoring in that I eventually spent the extra $200.00 or so for the logic probe setup that lets me use the mixed signal stuff in it. When in reality most of the logic analysis stuff I need to do on a routine basis I can do with a $15.00 USB logic analyzer and Sigrock. So is an $800.00 scope "overkill"? To me, that's probably on the borderline for a lot of people. Like Dave says, that's probably around the upper edge of what makes sense for a hobbyist. But if you can afford it, I don't see the harm in buying it and growing into its capabilities over time. But I don't think many (if any?) hobbyists should feel like they *need* to go out and buy an $800.00 scope, unless they have a very specific reason. One other thing: consider that you'll likely get more incremental value from buying better / specialized probes, than from buying a "better" scope, once you have any generally useful scope. Buying something like the Micsig 700V differential probe, and/or a Micsig CP2100A current probe will probably be more beneficial than buying a super fancy scope.

[@tomvleeuwen]

At work, we call those sub-1000 scopes "software" scopes. Not because how they operate, but for what purpose you can use them. They are perfect for debugging SPI, serial etc. Once you have to deal with high-speed signal integrity stuff, require calibration etc, we use more expensive scopes. But often those "software" scopes are also very usefull in debugging hardware.

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

Yes. Good for arduino and a lot of robotics, but these scopes are no match for today's gigahertz electronics.

[@LostDeadSoul]

You rock Dave! Not only on an engineering level but also delivering the most bang for your buck on the hardware side. They say cleanliness is next to godliness. But sharing this info is godliness. It's like "Welcome to this mornings hardware news! We bring you the ultimate headlines in electronics."

[@TorgeirFredriksen]

Thanks for the video! As said before I don't see why the Hantek DSO4102 is so bad. Had it for years and it still does its tasks. I can't justify an upgrade to a 1k $$ scope ...

[@fabianmerki4222]

i used my computer a few times: audio in, sound card and audacity to analyse simple timeing issue: :-) cheapest and works

[@bennyattar8862]

I work in a professional lab. We have a couple of 4 channel scopes, and I have never seen anyone use more than 2 channels at a time. Highest frequency is the most important feature for us. 200MHz minimum to be useful.

[@AllTheFasteners]

I regularly used 4 channels when testing a multi receiver radio alarm system. All the units had to synchronise and it was important to measure the deviation on average.

[@mfx1]

My full time time self employed job is electronics but virtually everything I do is around the DIY level and a £300 two channel scope and cheap sigrok logic analyser is more than enough for me. Bonus for me is I do a lot of field work and have already had a Rigol screen die from the scope rattling around in my van so cheap is good.

[@wtmayhew]

It depends on your hobby. One thing I wish I had on my scope is serial bus decode for CAN, I2C and similar. Big time saver if it did.

[@AttilaAsztalos]

Scope is the wrong tool for that for the budget-conscious enthusiast. Get a dirt-cheap logic analyzer supported by Sigrok and just use that. Buying some LA-wannabe scope with the all right "licenses" to decode elementary shit is for the filthy rich like Dave.

[@wtmayhew]

@@AttilaAsztalos My bench scope is a 200 MHz 4-ch Rigol I got quite a while ago, but is was a lot less expensive than this scope. Of course, it isn’t an MSO and there is not a built in generator. No regrets. I would not hesitate to trade bandwidth for the other features. I carry a 2-ch Owon scope/meter/generator rated for 100 MHz input bandwidth in my tool bag and it was well under $250. The Owon has been a great addition to my trouble shooting tool set. I used to carry an almost 40 year old Fluke 8060A, but the Owon is more capable albeit with a little less precision and a little less accuracy in the meter section but still plenty good for field work.

[@DavePoo2]

I have a Rigol DS1054Z, I've only used it around 6 or 7 times in the year or 2 I've had it, as all I want to do is fix a few retro computers. I've never used more than 1 channel on it. Is it overkill for me? maybe? Has it been incredibly useful, yes! Can I afford it? yes.

[@stephengentle2815]

We have a 6GHz, 20 GSa/s scope (Keysight MSO604A) and an active differential probe that itself probably costs more than a small car in the lab. We find it useful for doing stuff like eye diagrams on SERDES channels for SFPs, QSFPs, etc. - but of course that’s not really something a hobbyist would likely ever care to do! We mostly do RF though, so don’t touch the scope much for that - a hobbyist getting into RF would probably more want an entry level spectrum analyser than a fast scope.

[@andreyrushchenko2378]

it depends on hobbyist level - some dealing with hi-speed stuff like you do, but xGHz scopes and probes usually beyond hobbyist budget level :-( so, having one at work's lab helps! ;-)

[@tgirard123]

I just got the DHO914. 12 BIT, 125 MHZ. $699.00. impart mostly because of the review Dave did of the new rigol DHO 824 scope Couldn't be happier.

[@adambeaumont9169]

Oscilloscopes are a beginners tool anyways. With enough experience a seasoned electronist can smell the waveforms.

[@MatCatSoft]

I pretty much agree, My SDS1202X-E if my daily driver, extremely rare I need more, I do have an old school digital Tek with tube screen that can do 500MHz and 4 channel, but I rarely need it. For RF a NanoVNA goes a lot farther then a 1GHz scope :).

[@barrybogart5436]

The Tiny SAs are cheap now too.

[@robdavis3220]

My first scope was a Kenwood CS-4025. Still have it and it's still working. :0) A few years ago I bought a Rigol DS2072A. Been very happy with it. It was $800 at the time. This scope is also $800 , but you get much more for your money. It's nice to see entry level scopes at the price that hobbyists or beginners can afford. When I was starting out , even my Kenwood required me to take a loan from my company to buy. As a starting engineer , owning your own scope was not common.

[@GoldSrc_]

I also have a Kenwood CS-4025 lol. Works good for what I need so far, which is mostly audio stuff. Can't beat that beautiful green phosphor glow.

[@robdavis3220]

@@GoldSrc_ I love the old scopes. They really can't compete with the new stuff , but they have a feel about them that the new scopes just don't have. Not exactly a scientific observation :0) I think it's probably a nostalgia thing. When you used them for so long and they became so familiar , there was not much you could not fault find/debug. I have an old Hameg spectrum analyzer/tracking generator that only has the "conversion" electronics. It has a XY output for a scope to do the display. My Kenwood works great for this , my Rigol DS2000 series , just look crap.

[@MikelNaUsaCom]

When I was in H.S. about 40 years ago, taking an electronics class, we built our own O-scope from a kit as a project. Seems like alot has changed since then... =D Lots of fancy features besides watching a voltage change over time and putting that signal onto a CRT. Guess you have to buy instead of build in this case.

[@KonradTheWizzard]

You can still build very simple Osci kits. They are limited to +/- 5V and have a sample rate far below 1MHz. But it's good enough for most Arduino projects.

[@bennyattar8862]

In those days an analog 50MHz scope cost as much as a small car, and came with its' own trolley.

[@SirMo]

I started with a 2ch Rigol DS2072A (which was about $800 at the time), because it offered more bandwidth and at the time I was working on some pulse generators and I needed the higher bandwidth and sampling rate than I could get from the 4ch ds1054z. At the time I made a conscious decision to sacrifice channels for a higher capability. I also had other analog scopes I could use if I needed more channels and I could trigger them together if I needed to. But I agree with the advice. These days you can get a really nice scope for about $800. That would be my recommendation as well. If the budget is tight, even the $400 4ch scopes are quite capable. Most often I don't use more than 2ch anyway, and I find I still reach for my DS2072A often to measure things when performing repairs quite often. Even though I have a much more advanced 4ch R&S scope as well.

[@danielegger6460]

Main reason for getting a 2 CH model rather than 4 CH except for the lower price: Bandwidth... 70MHz is pretty much unusable nowadays, with entry-level MCUs easily pumping out 50Mhz SPI signals you wouldn't want to go much below 200Mhz...

[@Another8Years]

I bought an MSO5074 - definitely overkill for me. The hacked 1054z could do everything I needed, no problem. But I couldn't resist.

[@martino6172]

The rule is simple - either around a $1000 USD scope or a $100k+ USD scope, there is nothing in between. Most projects do not exceed MHz frequencies, but when you engage in something truly high-tech, you enter the realm of differential signals. If you start there, you will likely soon be dealing with USB 3.1, MIPI, HBR3 or HDMI signaling, where having 20Ghz is a must and even 6GHz is too weak.

[@WacKEDmaN]

for a hobbyist...yes... but it really depends on the use case... ...a cheap simple 40Mhz usb sillyscope is all a hobbyist really needs..maybe 100Mhz for the "power users" 800$ is way out of the ball park for majority of hobbyists ...that said...if ya can find a cheap CRO... grab it!

[@oldguy9051]

I got a 1054Z about three years ago and I'm still happy - after I replaced the fan with something quieter... My "next scope money" will purchase me a differential probe or two but certainly not a new scope because I want an "upgrade".

[@sdriza]

i just bought this 924S and love it... glad I waited, but also glad I finally "splurged" over 2 channel cheapos....

[@AndyGraceMedia]

I can really agree with this - good advice from Dave - and this very scope is absolutely great value for money for general purpose work.

[@nigozeroichi2501]

Glad I happened upon this, always been a tinkerer and been getting more and more interested in electronics, watched you and other channels and looked up the scopes, "ARE YOU 🤬ING KIDDING!" Was a little deflating, good to know that for what I'm looking to do $400-500 is perfect up to $800 probably way more than I'll ever need, awesome, learn something every time I watch.

[@jonaszwojcik]

Agreed. $800 is reasonable limit but for me it was $500 and I got SDS1104X-E ( 4chanels, hackable to 200 Mhz and dual ADC). I would not recommend anything below it and also in most cases you don't need anything more. Remaining $300 you can spend on signal generator and nice multimeter. Thanks for your SDS1104X-U teardown video. It helped me get the right one :) I was thinking about 2GS/s SDS2104X Plus but the price is more than twice as high! Looks like I did the right choice :)

[@rocketman221projects]

While the DS1054Z is pretty good for the price, a scope with a faster waveform update rate and better FFT would definitely be worth it if you have the budget for it.

[@sciencoking]

Yeah, it is a little laggy!

[@TheDefpom]

The X-U is a feature limited version of the X-E, the X-E has the web server built into it for remote control via a browser, the U doesn’t have that.

[@kmonyt]

While lately there's been an even better value for the dollar in scopes, buying my Keysight (refurbished w warranty) a few years back was one of the best purchases I've ever made. I wasted money on cheap Rigol's before that. There's a reason why the brand names are more expensive: quality firmware without annoying bugs, reliability of results, better UI design. My Keysight is a pleasure to use. I'd always urge you to consider all options, but if you're on the fence, you won't be disappointed spending the extra money!

[@Neverforget71324]

I spent $1400 on a Fluke/Philips scope meter back in 1992. I thought about it for about two months before I finally pulled the trigger.

[@thomasmaughan4798]

I wrestled for YEARS over which, if any, digital storage oscilloscope (DSO) to purchase as a replacement or augment of my excellent Phillips 25 MHz dual trace, dual timebase analog scope. Long story short, I purchased Keysight DSOX1202G. I have never needed 4 channels, I do need a signal generator and the built-in BODE plot function works remarkably well. I have a sense that it is lab grade, perhaps low end lab grade but a serious instrument.

[@roberthousedorfii1743]

I got the DS1054Z based on partly on your reviews, and for MY purposes, as a hobbyist, it will probably do me, winner, winner, chicken dinner, for the rest of my life. Even an $800 scope is a bit much, unless you NEED those features vs the DS1054Z. Like, NEED, TODAY or for the near future. You have to also look at the increase in training to USE those extra features.

[@rohitkhanna4487]

I find it hard to appreciate the need for expensive oscilloscope. One needs so many other tools good soldering station (weller metcal or JCB), 3 channel power suplly, 5.5 digit Keithley DMMs, function generator DSS etc, You need all the bits and not just a 1 grand scope....

[@lander1591]

Agreed, I've gotten by for the last 30 years using a $70 Weller butane pencil soldering iron, a powered USB strip, and an old car battery charger. My use case is Hobbyist DIY Electronics, Rpi and Arduino.

[@kevinjoyce5076]

I have spent the last couple of weeks looking for my first digital scope and I have learnt quite alot. It's all about compromise but in the end I agree a 4 channel scope is the way to go....as long as the sampling rate supports the bandwidth. Read specs carefully as data sheets can be misleading. Bang for buck as a hobby scope Siglent SDS1104X-E. It has 2 x ADC and therefore maintains a respectable sampling rate and has reasonable memory deph. I am finding it difficult to justify spening more ...

[@dmaynor]

I wish I watched this last week.

[@mrocklewitz]

Siglent 1104x-e for the win. Paid 499 for it 1.5yrs ago and have no regrets. it was between the siglent and the rigol 1054z. Siglent won cuz 3 year warranty and much faster user interface due to being newer/newer components. But i also have an owon vds1022i usb scope i use quite a bit. It works really good on linux with the open source version of the software on github.

[@evensgrey]

I can see blocks of hobbyists who could use more digital channels on the logic analyzer. If you're working on 8-bit computers, I can see wanting 24 digital channels so you can watch the address and data bus at the same time, or watch the MMU on the later 8 bit machines that had more than 64k of memory at the same time as the address bus.

[@brylozketrzyn]

Sometimes, when you have to go out and chase ghosts inside your high-speed circuit you will find, that oscilloscope with wider bandwidth can be really useful. But it will be cheaper to pay for few engineering hours in any lab nearby (even, if you have to drive there), than to buy a new one.

[@00Skyfox]

In my case, my "real world" hobbyist use of an oscilloscope is troubleshooting and repair of Commodore 64 computers and disk drives. They run at 1 MHz, and the video sync signal was what, something around 14 MHz? My 2-channel 20 MHz CRO is fine for my purposes. Anything else I do with it is just screwing around and playing/learning, such as learning how to use a 555 timer.

[@DasIllu]

So i'm that dork who actually bought a Hantec DSO2D10 for my electronics corner. And i am pleased with it. I'm doing everything on a budget and i know that a $250 scope has limitations and i bought it knowing that. So what am i actually doing with it? Some RF stuff. I really don't neet a 1GHz scope to see if the IF amp is clipping or something like that. I also do some fiddling with digital electronics. Most I²C and SPI stuff out there can at least be diagnosed with it (It has a built in decoder, but i prefer sigrok/pulseview). As Dave mentioned, i saved the rest of the money for ESD, meters, hot air station and most importantly a good electrical installation with noise suppression and some safety features. Oh and people thinking they need a 1GHz scope for tinkering with 433MHz RF hardware, get a spectrum analyzer instead so you don't conjure up a mob of angry hams with pitchforks :D

[@markburton3306]

I’ve been getting back into electronics after 30 years away being a software guy. I ended up getting a singlent 1104x-e. It’s superb and does stuff that would have blown my mind 30 years ago. Amazing really

[@Nets-nutsBr]

I've never used anything above 50MHz, 2 channels. So 100MHz and two channels is more than enough. Other thing. If you have a scope that makes cofee and do the kitchen like those with MSO and signal generator it is also a problem because if the scope fails by some reason, someone will be without signal generator, MSO, multimeter, scope and so on and no one will be able to fix it. I think that it would be better to have dedicated equipments. If one fails you still having the other ones.

[@box420]

I got a owan on amz and only use it for looking at ac power inverters and tuning amps. It works great I'm sure a rigol would blow it out of the water but it works for me

[@RichardEricCollins]

I have the 1054Z, love it. I got it as I had an issue that my cheap (ebay special) $100 scope could not do what I needed. The 1054Z found the issue within the 5 minutes of turning it on. I have been using it for years now and never let me down. I've been a coder for 25 plus years, in the last ten years moving into firmware coding. My 1054z has helped in every project I've had issues with. Including debugging an SPI issue on a customers board (the chip used had a HW fault). I love it. No need to upgrade. Debugs SPI, I2C and other comms no problem. :)

[@tookitogo]

I have the same scope and overall am very happy with it. Protocol decoding is the only real limitation I’ve run into: the fact it can only decode from the screen buffer dramatically reduces the decode length, to the point of it being a real limitation.

[@mikefox3542]

I've come to the exact same conclusion after comparing all available options and brands: the MSO5000 (MSO5074) is the best bang for the bucks for a home lab. Considering the hackability and DIY logic analyzer option. It's really seven instruments in one for ~$1000. Really a no-brainer. And I'm coming from a professional sigint environment where R&S is King.

[@newsogn5148]

It seems like rigol is going after keysight on this one…. It’s funny you didn’t mention keysight, their cheapest is 570? but with these features it was always like 1200 bucks…. Other KZbin electronics guys seem to love those but to the average joe it’s unobtaniom…. Thanks for staying realistic on this one Dave!

[@zyghom]

I got fascinated by the new equipment on the market, so I bought 2ch rigol. 2 months later I sold it and bought DM with oscilloscope built in - now I feel satisfied and more money in the pocket on ... thinkering ;-) We are sometimes too enthusiastic watching too many videos here and there ;-)

[@rebeccakatana820]

Thankyou for your advice i will save for the 800 one

[@byronwatkins2565]

When you are trying to figure out why something you invented is not working as expected, then being able to see four signals/channels simultaneously is often very helpful. But if you only need to know whether an OEM power supply's storage caps are still functional, then a single channel is plenty. It all depends upon your hobby and how much inconvenience you are willing to (and capable of) tolerating.